These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

So it is true you can earn 120m per hour from Iskursions?

Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
Ghost Legion.
#21 - 2011-11-27 13:07:17 UTC
Karn Dulake wrote:
ive heard its more like 150 million. bloke down the pub told me


I met him, sold me a super. Said they were Classic Models.

Don't ask about Italics, just tilt your head.
Tore Vest
#22 - 2011-11-27 13:10:20 UTC
Daedalus Arcova wrote:
Tore Vest wrote:
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:
NERF Incursions reward in Hi-sec


Shocked

Doesnt help..... we are still not moving to low/null Cool


You can stay in highsec and bear it up 'till your heart's content, for all I care. But highsec incursions are wrecking the economy. That's why the need nerfing - it's got nothing to do with encouraging people into nullsec (though that would be nice too).


Oh.. cmon... grow a brain

Everyone else knows that there is more isk in nullsec....

No troll.
Takseen
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2011-11-27 13:14:01 UTC
Daedalus Arcova wrote:

Highsec incursions need a massive nerf, either to put their ISK/hr on par or below L4 highsec missions, or to make them truly dynamic (and therefore far less easy to farm). It's unlikely to happen though, as that might lead to fewer players using a feature that CCP dedicated an entire expansion to.


You seem like a smart guy, so I'm gonna assume you just overlooked the stupidity of having a *group* activity be on par or below a *solo* activity in terms of ISK/hr.
Zagdul
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2011-11-27 13:17:34 UTC
Tore Vest wrote:
Daedalus Arcova wrote:
Tore Vest wrote:
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:
NERF Incursions reward in Hi-sec


Shocked

Doesnt help..... we are still not moving to low/null Cool


You can stay in highsec and bear it up 'till your heart's content, for all I care. But highsec incursions are wrecking the economy. That's why the need nerfing - it's got nothing to do with encouraging people into nullsec (though that would be nice too).


Oh.. cmon... grow a brain

Everyone else knows that there is more isk in nullsec....


Not really. Empire Incursions really aren't balanced. It's more hassle, more risk and you lose more ships in null. Not to mention the logistics necessary to make the isk.


One thing I never understood was how Concord will come save your asses when a pirate ganks you in empire, but they won't shoot Shansha. IMO, Incursions need to be moved to low sec or Concord needs to take a break when they're in town. However, I'm not gonna lose any sleep if they stay in High Sec.

Dual Pane idea: Click!

CCP Please Implement
Zagdul
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2011-11-27 13:20:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Zagdul
Takseen wrote:
Daedalus Arcova wrote:

Highsec incursions need a massive nerf, either to put their ISK/hr on par or below L4 highsec missions, or to make them truly dynamic (and therefore far less easy to farm). It's unlikely to happen though, as that might lead to fewer players using a feature that CCP dedicated an entire expansion to.


You seem like a smart guy, so I'm gonna assume you just overlooked the stupidity of having a *group* activity be on par or below a *solo* activity in terms of ISK/hr.



It's the whole risk vs. reward thing that people are generally upset about.

The fact that you can rat in complete safety in empire and make just as much isk per hour hitting your wallet plus loyalty points and salvage with less logistics and risk involved. EVE has always been designed where risk = reward. As it stands, empire is a safer and better source of income over null for a grunt. They really have no benefit for living in space they fight to hold.

EDIT: However this will change a bit when alliances like mine add perks like 0% tax for PI.

Dual Pane idea: Click!

CCP Please Implement
Generals4
#26 - 2011-11-27 13:21:51 UTC
Kaivar Lancer wrote:
So I recently took advantage of the $5 resub offer to see how the game has changed in the last 12 months and have read in some posts that you can earn as much as 120m isk per hour running iskursions??? Seriously CCP, why? I used to manage a trading corporation that made 100m per day. But now I can earn 1b isk if I dedicate a weekend to iskursions. What is the point of every other occupation in Eve Online if iskursions blow them out of the water?


120mill isk is actually really rare. Unless your fleet is pimped up beyond belief getting so much isk/hour in high sec incursions is almost impossible. On average people get 50-100mill isk/hour , still a lot, but not that much.

_-Death is nothing, but to live defeated and inglorious is to die daily. _
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#27 - 2011-11-27 13:23:15 UTC

Greedy idiots who play only for more and more ISK,
don't have any real reason to play anyway.

It's one of the lowest reasons to play,
because it's only to satisfy the lowest of all instinct.

Collect worthless stuff and feel great about it,
and worst part is, they want to do it in the easiest, risk averse way possible.

And they are ruining the game with their attitude.

I hope low life scum like that dies early.
Takseen
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2011-11-27 13:26:48 UTC
Zagdul wrote:

One thing I never understood was how Concord will come save your asses when a pirate ganks you in empire, but they won't shoot Shansha. IMO, Incursions need to be moved to low sec or Concord needs to take a break when they're in town. However, I'm not gonna lose any sleep if they stay in High Sec.

Same thing could be said for the existence of ANY pirate NPCs in highsec. Concord just doesn't make sense storywise. They're a game mechanic alternative to just not being able to shoot players at highsec. And I think most people would agree Concord are the less annoying option there.

Here's something I've been wondering about though. Why don't opponents of these "ISK fountains" do more to shut them down, or make life harder for the Incursion runners. Just off the top of my head, you could
-kill the mothership upon spawning to shut down the Incursion early
-suicide jam their logistics at a crucial moment
-outdpsing their fleet in a site and stealing the payout
Anyone not personally capable of these feats could always pay others to do it.

I mean its not like the Incursion runners would be hard to find, there's only a few systems with Vanguard sites up at any given time.
Zagdul
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2011-11-27 13:30:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Zagdul
Takseen wrote:
Zagdul wrote:

One thing I never understood was how Concord will come save your asses when a pirate ganks you in empire, but they won't shoot Shansha. IMO, Incursions need to be moved to low sec or Concord needs to take a break when they're in town. However, I'm not gonna lose any sleep if they stay in High Sec.

Same thing could be said for the existence of ANY pirate NPCs in highsec. Concord just doesn't make sense storywise. They're a game mechanic alternative to just not being able to shoot players at highsec. And I think most people would agree Concord are the less annoying option there.

Here's something I've been wondering about though. Why don't opponents of these "ISK fountains" do more to shut them down, or make life harder for the Incursion runners. Just off the top of my head, you could
-kill the mothership upon spawning to shut down the Incursion early
-suicide jam their logistics at a crucial moment
-outdpsing their fleet in a site and stealing the payout
Anyone not personally capable of these feats could always pay others to do it.

I mean its not like the Incursion runners would be hard to find, there's only a few systems with Vanguard sites up at any given time.


I can't answer for other alliances however for mine it's too much effort. The people who are mostly against the faucets in empire are busy running an empire of their own in null sec and don't have the time to invest the effort in griefing them.

I do know that many null sec alliances seek out and run incursions. In my coalition it's very common to have a standing fleet going 23.5/7 for them.

EDIT: From an RP stance, I'd think Sansha in high security space should spawn some kind of retaliation from faction police and concord. If not, than they should be completely neutered to the point where they don't cover the people running them. Similar to low sec.

Dual Pane idea: Click!

CCP Please Implement
Takseen
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#30 - 2011-11-27 13:32:22 UTC
Zagdul wrote:
Takseen wrote:
Daedalus Arcova wrote:

Highsec incursions need a massive nerf, either to put their ISK/hr on par or below L4 highsec missions, or to make them truly dynamic (and therefore far less easy to farm). It's unlikely to happen though, as that might lead to fewer players using a feature that CCP dedicated an entire expansion to.

You seem like a smart guy, so I'm gonna assume you just overlooked the stupidity of having a *group* activity be on par or below a *solo* activity in terms of ISK/hr.

It's the whole risk vs. reward thing that people are generally upset about.
The fact that you can rat in complete safety in empire and make just as much isk per hour hitting your wallet plus loyalty points and salvage with less logistics and risk involved. EVE has always been designed where risk = reward. As it stands, empire is a safer and better source of income over null for a grunt. They really have no benefit for living in space they fight to hold.
EDIT: However this will change a bit when alliances like mine add perks like 0% tax for PI.

Oh I agree, nullsec should pay better than empire to compensate for the risk and inconveniene. But the guy I quoted wanted incursions "on par or below L4 highsec missions", and that's just stupid. Its important to reward the people who actually take the effort to group up with more income/hr. Plus Incursions are probably harder, or atleast I can't imagine them being any easier than level 4 missions.
Takseen
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2011-11-27 13:36:59 UTC
Zagdul wrote:


I can't answer for other alliances however for mine it's too much effort. The people who are mostly against the faucets in empire are busy running an empire of their own in null sec and don't have the time to invest the effort in griefing them.

I do know that many null sec alliances seek out and run incursions. In my coalition it's very common to have a standing fleet going 23.5/7 for them.

EDIT: From an RP stance, I'd think Sansha in high security space should spawn some kind of retaliation from faction police and concord. If not, than they should be completely neutered to the point where they don't cover the people running them. Similar to low sec.

The fluff reason is that Concord and empire navies are protecting the planetary populations from the Sansha abduction squads, so they're not available to go on the offensive. And all this happens "off-camera" so to speak.
It mightn't be a bad idea to give lòw and null incursions a buff to the payouts and a nerf to the influence bar, to reflect the fact that there's fewer people available to push it to 0% and spawn the boss.
Zagdul
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2011-11-27 13:37:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Zagdul
Takseen wrote:
Zagdul wrote:
Takseen wrote:
Daedalus Arcova wrote:

Highsec incursions need a massive nerf, either to put their ISK/hr on par or below L4 highsec missions, or to make them truly dynamic (and therefore far less easy to farm). It's unlikely to happen though, as that might lead to fewer players using a feature that CCP dedicated an entire expansion to.

You seem like a smart guy, so I'm gonna assume you just overlooked the stupidity of having a *group* activity be on par or below a *solo* activity in terms of ISK/hr.

It's the whole risk vs. reward thing that people are generally upset about.
The fact that you can rat in complete safety in empire and make just as much isk per hour hitting your wallet plus loyalty points and salvage with less logistics and risk involved. EVE has always been designed where risk = reward. As it stands, empire is a safer and better source of income over null for a grunt. They really have no benefit for living in space they fight to hold.
EDIT: However this will change a bit when alliances like mine add perks like 0% tax for PI.

Oh I agree, nullsec should pay better than empire to compensate for the risk and inconveniene. But the guy I quoted wanted incursions "on par or below L4 highsec missions", and that's just stupid. Its important to reward the people who actually take the effort to group up with more income/hr. Plus Incursions are probably harder, or atleast I can't imagine them being any easier than level 4 missions.


I personally disagree. I feel lvl 4 missions pay out more than they should in comparison to what null sec does for it's anomalies.

I look at it from a grunt's perspective in null sec who plays to defend their empire. Those people should have advantages over people in high security space as they're taking more risks and generally spend more isk on a daily basis paying for ships to build their space castles. In my opinion, in order to help retention in EVE, the grunts in null need something that benefits them and not just having the resources such as moons which generally assist in paying sov bills. The bottom line is that in null sec, as an alliance, you can be successful. The amount of effort, time and risk put into that far out weighs what it's worth considering you can hang up your hat and go chill in empire and run incursions.

Basically, if I decided to drop all sov and run my alliance off incursion taxes and low sec moons, I could in essence be a much more wealthy alliance with less overhead. This is where I feel the imbalance is.

Dual Pane idea: Click!

CCP Please Implement
Daedalus Arcova
The Scope
#33 - 2011-11-27 13:40:19 UTC
Tore Vest wrote:
Daedalus Arcova wrote:
Tore Vest wrote:
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:
NERF Incursions reward in Hi-sec


Shocked

Doesnt help..... we are still not moving to low/null Cool


You can stay in highsec and bear it up 'till your heart's content, for all I care. But highsec incursions are wrecking the economy. That's why the need nerfing - it's got nothing to do with encouraging people into nullsec (though that would be nice too).


Oh.. cmon... grow a brain

Everyone else knows that there is more isk in nullsec....


There used to be, but not any more. Between the anomaly nerf and the incursion ISK-fountain, it's got to the point where members of my own nullsec alliance would rather to go to highsec to run incursions than make ISK in the 0.0 space that they're living in.

So it's not just that highsec bears are making too much money (though they are). It's that highsec is actually depleting nullsec of nullsec-willing players. Those players want the nullsec playstyle, but given the choice between grinding in nullsec (with all its drawbacks) for meagre rewards and highsec incursions with insane rewards and no risk, it's just economically irrational to try to make ISK in nullsec. Highsec incursions are literally sucking the life out of nullsec.
Zagdul
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2011-11-27 13:43:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Zagdul
Takseen wrote:
Zagdul wrote:


I can't answer for other alliances however for mine it's too much effort. The people who are mostly against the faucets in empire are busy running an empire of their own in null sec and don't have the time to invest the effort in griefing them.

I do know that many null sec alliances seek out and run incursions. In my coalition it's very common to have a standing fleet going 23.5/7 for them.

EDIT: From an RP stance, I'd think Sansha in high security space should spawn some kind of retaliation from faction police and concord. If not, than they should be completely neutered to the point where they don't cover the people running them. Similar to low sec.

The fluff reason is that Concord and empire navies are protecting the planetary populations from the Sansha abduction squads, so they're not available to go on the offensive. And all this happens "off-camera" so to speak.
It mightn't be a bad idea to give lòw and null incursions a buff to the payouts and a nerf to the influence bar, to reflect the fact that there's fewer people available to push it to 0% and spawn the boss.


With the cost of things skyrocketing in game right now and the sheer level of inflation happening with things such as PLEX's. The easiest way for CCP to intervene is to create more faucets for younger pilots in null sec in order to inject isk into the hands of people who are hard to retain as life could be easier for them in empire.

CCP's solution to buff our "hidden hubs" didn't do the trick. The idea, I'm sure, sounded very nice on paper "lets buff and add more battleships to the lower anoms so there will be a higher isk payout". However, this hurts the younger, < 6 month old grunts in null as those guys struggle to run hidden hubs as it is.

POCO's will help, but that makes slaves out of grunts doing things that are un-fun such as Planetary Interaction.

In all, I think the base payout for battleship spawns in nullsec need an increase. This would allow for lower skill point pilots to make a living (again) off belt ratting. I also feel belt ratting in null needs a looking at. Potentially something could be done to enhance it and make it more interesting and inviting to newer people to null who don't have very many skill points.

Dual Pane idea: Click!

CCP Please Implement
Tore Vest
#35 - 2011-11-27 13:46:07 UTC
Zagdul wrote:


I personally disagree. I feel lvl 4 missions pay out more than they should in comparison to what null sec does for it's anomalies.

I look at it from a grunt's perspective in null sec who plays to defend their empire. Those people should have advantages over people in high security space as they're taking more risks and generally spend more isk on a daily basis paying for ships to build their space castles. In my opinion, in order to help retention in EVE, the grunts in null need something that benefits them and not just having the resources such as moons which generally assist in paying sov bills. The bottom line is that in null sec, as an alliance, you can be successful. The amount of effort, time and risk put into that far out weighs what it's worth considering you can hang up your hat and go chill in empire and run incursions.

Basically, if I decided to drop all sov and run my alliance off incursion taxes and low sec moons, I could in essence be a much more wealthy alliance with less overhead. This is where I feel the imbalance is.


Im pretty shure most of you nullbears have an alt running highsec incursions Cool

No troll.
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#36 - 2011-11-27 13:46:41 UTC
Daedalus Arcova wrote:

Highsec incursions need a massive nerf, either to put their ISK/hr on par or below L4 highsec missions


Yes, let's make grouping and working together to accomplish something earn you the same as running solo.
Why should we even play with each other? Let's just make EVE a solo game.
Such a clever little brick you are. Here have a candy.
Daedalus Arcova
The Scope
#37 - 2011-11-27 13:47:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Daedalus Arcova
Takseen wrote:
Zagdul wrote:
Takseen wrote:
Daedalus Arcova wrote:

Highsec incursions need a massive nerf, either to put their ISK/hr on par or below L4 highsec missions, or to make them truly dynamic (and therefore far less easy to farm). It's unlikely to happen though, as that might lead to fewer players using a feature that CCP dedicated an entire expansion to.

You seem like a smart guy, so I'm gonna assume you just overlooked the stupidity of having a *group* activity be on par or below a *solo* activity in terms of ISK/hr.

It's the whole risk vs. reward thing that people are generally upset about.
The fact that you can rat in complete safety in empire and make just as much isk per hour hitting your wallet plus loyalty points and salvage with less logistics and risk involved. EVE has always been designed where risk = reward. As it stands, empire is a safer and better source of income over null for a grunt. They really have no benefit for living in space they fight to hold.
EDIT: However this will change a bit when alliances like mine add perks like 0% tax for PI.

Oh I agree, nullsec should pay better than empire to compensate for the risk and inconveniene. But the guy I quoted wanted incursions "on par or below L4 highsec missions", and that's just stupid. Its important to reward the people who actually take the effort to group up with more income/hr. Plus Incursions are probably harder, or atleast I can't imagine them being any easier than level 4 missions.


Yes, you're right, my bad. Group activity should of course be more rewarding than solo activity. So highsec L4s probably need a good whack with the nerfbat as well.

Remember though, a large proportion of the players who run highsec incursions only work together for the duration of their involvement in that incursion. While there are some dedicated incursion-running corps, you can't say that Incursions' group play is on the same level as say, living in a wormhole, or taking and holding space in nullsec.

Nullsec sov-holding is at the top end of group activity in EVE. It should be significantly more rewarding than highsec, including the temporary teamwork of incursions.
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#38 - 2011-11-27 13:50:40 UTC
Daedalus Arcova wrote:

Nullsec sov-holding is at the top end of group activity in EVE. It should be significantly more rewarding than highsec, including the temporary teamwork of incursions.


That's right. That is why you have nullsec incursions Big smile.
The thing is, different professions pay differently depending on the skillset of that pilot, but nullsec will always pay you more.

Trading stuff in nullsec vs. highsec.
Freighting stuff in nullsec vs. highsec.
Exploring in nullsec. vs. highsec.
Mining in nullsec vs. highsec.
Running incursions in nullsec vs. highsec.

Takseen
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#39 - 2011-11-27 13:51:39 UTC
Tore Vest wrote:


Im pretty shure most of you nullbears have an alt running highsec incursions Cool


Yes, and if they are then that *doesn't make sense* from a game design perspective. If these people have all this space they're quite literally paying for, why are they drawn back to highsec? The risk/reward balance must be off somewhere.
Sir Substance
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#40 - 2011-11-27 13:54:11 UTC
Renan Ruivo wrote:
You can make 120m isk/h. However good luck in keeping that stream constant.


And that m'friends is the nature of the game. You can make 200mil an hour running hacking sites. If you're lucky, you'll even get a whole hours worth of hacking sites in before they run dry!

Incursions are competitive. On a good day, you can indeed clean up. But most days are not good days.

The beatings will continue until posting improves. -Magnus Cortex

Official Eve Online changelist: Togglable PvP. - Jordanna Bauer